Shastra is divided into two categories : SwaMatha Stapana and ParaMatha Khanda

These are some of the statements which are floating around the internet.

God – An Advaita or Dwaita or Vishishtadvaita ?

– every person has his own differen view and explanation about God. All the theories are based on guess.No one has evidence to support his view.
– God is an ‘ADVAITEE’. He has free will to be a ‘dwaiti’ and also ‘vishistadvaiti’. O.kay.
– Advaita – God is universe, including you & me
– These 3 are the color of the glasses. God will appear in a color through which you see Him.
– All the three are the ways to lead us to God. Hence all 3 are the forms of God
– These were some of the ways to define God who is beyond words.
– Even if someone prefers to worship other Gods, it ultimately reaches Govinda (Keshavam prati gachhathy). Instead of handing over the letter directly, why send it through a post man. The sages tell us Narayana resides in each and every one of us and He is closer to us than we are to ourselves (and therefore there is no need for a post man)
– all the three philosophies have an equal place in the system of Vedanta and it is just natural that each one considers his own system superior to the other.

#1
These are just some of the millions of statements and feelings of a lot of people. In fact people get angry when disproving advaita, to the extent that they say “Sri HariVayuStuti” is not be chanted since it condemns shankara.

Firstly this is an extension of their philosophy of abheda (non difference), hence they try not to see any difference in the philosophies. Dvaita is the only one that strongly propounds bheda, so being true to our philosophy let us examine the bhedas between the concepts.

advaita, vishishta advaita, bheda abheda, shudh advaita, kevala advaita, etc. all other schools of thought propound that we will become God at some level or another, famous example we are sparks of fire and we return to the fire.

Dvaita alone says that you were never God and will never be. If you claim to be GOD in anyway or at any stage; then you don’t know about GOD at all. Even a spark of GOD is infinite; and infinite is something that cannot be even fathomed forget becoming it.
Sri Hari is nirdosha, sakala guna paripoorna, sadchidananda, ananta ananta guna paripoorna with such qualities how can anyone stake a claim to be GOD.
Ex. Sri Krishna avataara is just a black hair of Sri Hari. He shows whole Vishwaroopa in that avataara. Even a part of infinity is infinity.

In “Pramana Lakshana”, SriMadhvacharya gives a detailed approach on what is proof, and what can be expected as proof?
Pratyaksha pramana is one such proof. Let me give an illustration; lets say the itenary of a person X says he’s supposed to be in a meeting at 1:00 PM; but you see him in the canteen at that time. Seeing him in the canteen overrides his itenary therefore; he is present in the canteen and not in the meeting.
If you try to argue just on the basis of his itenary that he is not X or that he has not seen X; then it is a foolhardy logic.

Applying this pramana, Sri Hari is Sakala guna paripoorna this is anubhava; can anyone else prove to be complete or incomplete. Sri Hari is sarvatra vyapta, Sri Hari is present everywhere; are you present everywhere?

Each guna is ananta in Sri Hari, can anyone claim to swim across the ocean, let alone be the ocean. I’m just trying to iterate bheda theory because all other philosophies at some or other point claim to merge with GOD.
Dvaita on the other hand, clearly proves that even in Moksha you are seperate from GOD. If you jump into the ocean, you don’t become the ocean you are just a body in the ocean. Even in Mukti, by GOD’s grace you experience happiness; but you never become GOD.

No matter how shastras are interpreted if this conclusion does not come forth, then it is a waste of intellectual effort.

* Note we have already seen “Swantantro Bhagvan Vishnuh”; if you are not independent then you cannot be Sri Hari. End of Discussion!!!

#2
The mother of all such statements is that Dvaita is the first stage of spiritual development, Vishishta Advaita is the next step and the last step is advaita.
The problem with this statement, is that people even if they are convinced of Dvaita, they quote this and escape. It then becomes a matter of faith and not of pramana.

As per my research, this statement has been made by Appaya Dixit. A little about Appaya Dixit, before his statement; he was Sri 1008 Vijayendra Swami’s contemporary. Starting from the introduction, he used everyday attack Dvaita and everyday he would be defeated by Sri Vijayendra swamy. His frustration is evident in many of his statements and works. Sri Vijayendra swami has the highest number of works attributed to a Madhva Yati (100+) and most of them are in response to appaya dixit’s works.
With this background, it is easy to see why he would have provided a faith based back door exit, when all other arguments fail. In fact appaya dixit is a renowned scholar in advaita world; but the whole picture is he used to massively fall short and was frustrated every day by Sri Vijayendra Teertharu.

#3
Instead of handing over the letter directly, why send it through a post man
This obviously questions taratamya and Vayu Jeevotama tattva. There are plenty of shastras that can be quoted as to why all souls have to approach Vayu devaru for mukti.
Taking the same example; Mukti is an official application, even if you live next door to the centre; the application will be accepted officialy only if you post it.
Sri Hari Vayu Stuti mentions that Vayu Devaru takes all the mukti yogya souls and makes recommendations to give Moksha to the souls. This recommendation alone is considered and Sri Hari decides based on this recommendation.

We are talking about scoring very very high marks in our life examination. Hence we need to manage time and answers need to be as per the shastras not as per intellect. If it really is so easy and anyone can do anything, then why need scriptures at all.There are numerous ways to fail and numerous ways to pass; but for Rank students all their papers will be similar and few.
Dvaita is an shinning parade of such Rank Holders !!!

I’m just comparing, one aspect of the conclusions; without going into the derivation. We can get into detailed discussion of each claim and see how great Dvaita is compared to the other claims. Lot of people consider it just another approach; but Scholars who dwell on it know that it is not just great; but it is by miles and miles the best approach.

You said that all other philosophies at some or other point claim to merge with GOD. But Vishishtadvaita of Ramanuja and Achintya Bhedabheda of Sri Chaitanya or even Dvaitadvaita of Nimbarka and Shuddhadvaita of Vishnu Swamy never claimed to merge with GOD after Mukti except Kevala Advaita of Shankara.

advaita in it’s root means “not two” or basically “the same”; in other words equivalence between Bhagavan and souls.

Dvaita is the only philosophy that does not compromise it’s stance it vehmenently denies any equivalance to Bhagavan either here or in moksha or anywhere else. Lord SriHari is totally unique in infinite ways.

1. Visishtadvaita is a specialized form of advaita but advaita nonetheless. It argues similarity in moksha, which is absurd.

Visishtadvaita is also an Advaita, since only God the Absolute,
omnipresent Self exists. However, our concept of God
refers to that Supreme Entity which contains all within
itself; the entire universe, including all living beings, are
fundamentally real and internally distinguishable from one another.
***However, there is only one total reality ***, as God includes all
existence within Its very being. The individual selfs and the
universe exist as God’s attributes, since God pervades absolutely
everything and gifts these substances with their reality.
In other words, God is the indwelling
Self of all, and this “all” is real as they are included in
His body. Therefore, Visishtadvaita literally means
non-duality of the qualified, since God is qualified by
innumerable glorious attributes, including individual selves
and matter.

Notice the difference in approach of Advaita and Visishtadvaita.
The former’s conception of the Absolute has no attributes —
hence the discipline of meditation there does not in the end
rely on bhakti. The latter has as its centerpiece a supreme being
full of perfections and attributes, so the aspirant has no choice
but to revel in these kalyANa-guNas. From this basic difference
in approach we can derive all the other differences between these
schools of Vedanta.

2. Achintya Bheda Abheda was formed to adopt a “secular” approach, harmonize differences and appeal to both sides to garner popularity.

The characteristic position of all the different Bhedābheda Vedānta schools is that the individual self (jīvātman) is both different and not different from the ultimate reality known as Brahman. Bhedābheda reconciles the positions of two other major schools of Vedānta. The Advaita (Monist) Vedānta that claims the individual self is completely identical to Brahman, and the Dvaita (Dualist) Vedānta that teaches complete difference between the individual self and Brahman